Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Shuma up above pretty much nails every point in this thread, especially with regards to the counters to the tanks Missle Launchers can't handle; you should have other stuff in your army to make up for its AV14 issues.

That, and his willingness to swipe down the troll.

Both las cannons and missle launchers have their advantages

Las cannons are more effective against
Vehicles especially av13-14 (str9)
Obliterators (ap2)
Terminators (ap2)
2+ Save Tyranid Monsterous creatures (ap2)

Missle Launchers are cheaper and have a frag mode that is useful against
Horde Orks
Horde Imperial Guard

It really depends what you you play against. Both should be included in your army.

If your limiting the option to just dev squads, 4 missle dev squad does give you is flexability it has the option for a frag missle that is great against hordes and can still shoot at tanks and keeping the cost down so this might be the way to go if you insist on having dev squads.

However, Dev squads lack mobility and do not seem worth it in 5th because in the Dawn of War mission you walk onto the board and the game might end on turn 5 so you only get 4 turns of shooting with them.

What I like instead of missle dev squads is cyclone terminators combat squaded. You put 5 in a land raider and the other 5 with the 2 cyclones in the back field. They function like a 4 missle dev squad since each cyclone can fire twice however they are more resilient and are better in assault and can fire while moving onto the board in dawn of war if you search light something to shoot at.

Someone brought up the auto cannon as being effective anti tank.

Instead of a dev squad for 120 pts you can have a Predator with a twin linked auto cannon and las cannon sponsons. If anti tank is your role this probably is better then the more expensive 4 missle dev squads and you can have 2 Predators for the cost of a large 4 las dev squad.

For av13 and 14 the multimelta attack bike is just better then either las cannons or missles.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Lascannons and missile launchers are both a waste of points for tactical squads.

G

I do not see how free equates to a waste of points in the case of the missle launcher as it is free when you buy 10 marines.

However there is an opportunity cost of fire power of bolter marines that you give up when you shoot your las cannon at a vehicle because the bolters are ineffective. In a squad of 10 this is 9 marines with bolters not firing, this can be minimized by combat squading so it is better to mount las cannons on a vehicle like a predator or a land raider where you just shooting heavy weapons at that vehicle.

I do not see how free equates to a waste of points in the case of the missle launcher as it is free when you buy 10 marines.

10 marines aren't free though, so in GBF's opnion you wasted those points if taking a ML or Lascannon with em. Not all that hard to understand.

What he was trying to convey was that neither compare to the other options that tacticals can take, and I am gonna assume he means the MM and the PC. dunno that I agree in all cases, but I am sure that is his point.

That's it... I would rather take an MM for tactical squads. Any other heavy weapons are mobile and I will pack a ton of meltaguns.

G

I've heard good things about 3ml/1lc for devs. One LC isn't much more expense on the squad, and a bs5 las isn't something you shrug off. Thoughts?

If you're an AV14 vehicle, BS5 las is something you shrug off. And 3 S8 BS4 MLs is definitely something you shrug off.

By taking a lascannon with missile launchers, you are effectively forcing the squad to shoot at something the lascannon is better at (wasting MLs) or something the MLs are better at (wasting Las). A lascannon isn't a point and click IWIN button versus AV14. You literally need volleys of lascans to knock out vehicles reliably.

Playing a guard army, I have always gone with Las over Missle. Even Autocannon over Missle. Anything Missle can do, either Las or Auto can do better. A unit with 2+ saves will willingly walk into ap3 fire. With lascannons, it's that ap2 that makes everything trusting their body armor make sure to hug cover and not full out run into the shots. Im sure it's all in the opponents head, but facing down a battery of lascannons makes them play all the more defencive. Which is great when IG can out defence practicly everything. As for points, I'll gladly pay an extra 10 for that extra str and AP.
Yes, there is something to be said for the dual purpose of Missles, but if you're jack of all, you're master of none.

-Deewalla

side note: I have a favour to ask. Can we please stop talking about how ML and MM are good because they're free? Let's be honest, they're not really free. Like 'free' health care and 'free' public education are just paid for via taxes, so too are your 'free' heavy weapons just written into the cost of your marines. If the 10-man squad only cost 100 points, and you had to buy a MM for 70 points, would you be freaking out because the ML is suddenly super overcosted? I hope not.

[/ ]

I'll take the MM before I'll take anything else. When there's a 12" bubble of doom around every tactical squad for enemy vehicles, it's not hard to corral them. Besides, the only place the ML is superior to the MM is in the 24"-48" range, which is not hard to mitigate even on foot, let alone transport-bound.

Green Blow Fly wrote:That's it... I would rather take an MM for tactical squads. Any other heavy weapons are mobile and I will pack a ton of meltaguns.

G

That army is going to get raped by anything with an armor value or 2+ save beyond 24 inches. Hell, at above 12 that MM is only minorly better than a missile launcher, and still not comparable to a lascanon. Now add the fact that a MM is worse than a lascanon against basic troops (half the range, ap1 doesn't matter) and you're going to have an even harder time. You're also going to be screwed when a monolith or avatar drops down in front of your army with all that melta dependancy, though you're probably playing the metagame so I doubt you see the "weaker" armies much.

Missle Launchers are cheaper and have a frag mode that is useful against
Horde Orks
Horde Imperial Guard

Tyranids (all of them except 2+ MCs).
Eldar (all of them except... Well no, it's just great against all of them).
Tau (all of them except broadsides)
Dark Eldar (there is nothing in the dark eldar army that cares about the difference between a ML or Lascanon. Or a ML or MM for that matter. MLs are just universally better here.)
Daemons (against anything that isn't packing a 2+ save or FNP)


That frag shot is great against a lot of things, and the krak missile is a great fallback on things like 3+ dakkafexes or raiders that can't tell the difference between a lascanon or ML.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:That's it... I would rather take an MM for tactical squads. Any other heavy weapons are mobile and I will pack a ton of meltaguns.

G

That army is going to get raped by anything with an armor value or 2+ save beyond 24 inches. Hell, at above 12 that MM is only minorly better than a missile launcher, and still not comparable to a lascanon. Now add the fact that a MM is worse than a lascanon against basic troops (half the range, ap1 doesn't matter) and you're going to have an even harder time. You're also going to be screwed when a monolith or avatar drops down in front of your army with all that melta dependancy, though you're probably playing the metagame so I doubt you see the "weaker" armies much.

Go back and read what I said. Any other heavy weapons are mobile. I am not saying go all melta in total exclusion to any ranged shooting over 24". You just ran your mouth for no reason.

G

One can combat squad Devs, right? Might it not make sense to put together a 2ML/2LC unit and break it up in objective missions, putting the signum in with the Lascannon boys?

Also, saying a MM is not free because you have to take 10 marines is not strictly accurate. You need 10 marines to take ANYTHING. As such, a plasma gun or las cannon still costs more than the MM, which you do not pay extra for. The 10 marines are a sunk cost by the time you are trying to figure out what gun to give them.

I've been playing 40k for awhile now, since 1st. Competitively since 3rd. I JUST now picked up marines as I really liked the new codex and changes.

From what I've seen, while the MM is awesome and free, you need the range. While the ML is flexible and free, it lacks the armor piercing power.

You need lascannons in a marine list. At least 3 to reliably take out any armor.

I think we are all of the mind set that more often than not vehicles will get a cover save. When from experience, most tanks move up to get into range.

Vindicator
Demolisher without las plas
Land Raider to drop its pay load
Trukks
Rhinos

Serpents, Falcons, Raiders, and Ravagers are the few vehicles that come to mind that might get a cover save, while the Tau have a moving cover save.

With a cover save, unless you are playing Tau, regardless what you shoot, half of the time it didn't matter. But when it does matter you want to make sure you got the job done. Higher strength gives you a higher chance of getting it done.

Note, Power of the Machine Spirit essentially means stunning a land raider (variant) does very little. With EA you can still essentially move 12" every turn and fire 1 weapon.

Any other heavy weapons are mobile.

Sooo..... What does that entail exactly? I'm shooting my mouth off because your a troll with bad use of grammar and an annoying tendency to make crap up (remember death strike?) and assume everyone else knows what the hell you're talking about.

Mobile heavy weapons. Oxymoron. Mobile how? On tanks? Dreadnauts? Bikes? How about a little explanation before opening your troll hole.

There is no way that anyone will ever agree what is better. It is all down to personal taste. Each weapon has there advantage and disadvantage, its up to you to weigh up the traits of the weapon so that it suits your army best.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Any other heavy weapons are mobile.

Sooo..... What does that entail exactly? I'm shooting my mouth off because your a troll with bad use of grammar and an annoying tendency to make crap up (remember death strike?) and assume everyone else knows what the hell you're talking about.

Mobile heavy weapons. Oxymoron. Mobile how? On tanks? Dreadnauts? Bikes? How about a little explanation before opening your troll hole.

You really need to chill out.

I am impressed you could answer your own question. You get a gold star.

And no I don't make stuff up - you just don't have the vision to comprehend where I am coming from junior.

G

Lord Bingo wrote:There is no way that anyone will ever agree what is better. It is all down to personal taste. Each weapon has there advantage and disadvantage, its up to you to weigh up the traits of the weapon so that it suits your army best.

Simply not true. The old epithet of if I say it loud it enuff and long enuff, eventually you will come around ;-)

And no I don't make stuff up - you just don't have the vision to comprehend where I am coming from junior.

You end your posts with G. I don't have enough brain damage to comprehend where your coming from.

i have my oppinions like everyone else, but ML's seem like a cheap substitue.

against AV 14's ML's are going to do nothing, las atleast have a chance.
i rather spend extra points and know that a lith or raider isnt going anywhere than risk letting it get close enough to cause problems.

also, the blast is nice from frag, but that would be a job for HB's.

i rate this the same as plasma cannon, nice wep, but its trying to take on 2 rolls in fights.
i rather take a dev of HB's and a dev of las to ensure the job is done.

also, on another note for ML's, what good are they against termies or meganobz?
they are the last things you want walking into your lines.

that was a good one Shuma.



G

Anyways the game is all about mobility now. Units that are static and shoot will be overrun. The missile launcher is free and has good range but with the abundance of cover saves and the fact it bounces off AV14 makes it rather ineffective against a lot of lists. I would take multi-melta because it is also free, is just as good inside 24" and it can bust armor well. At least an opponent might think twice before rushing up with their landraider. Attack bikes with multi-meltas and Vulkan leading the army are a real threat.

If I had to choose between a missile launcher and a lascannon for a tactical squad I would pay the points for S9 with 48" range. The lascannon is still cheap for a tactical squad and if you want to play with static squads that shoot then it is better to put the lascannons In your tactical squads so you can shoot them at multiple targets. Devastators with lascannons are an expensive unit and you can only shoot at one enemy unit per turn. I would rather take heavy bolters in a Dev squad so you can soak enemy infantry... that way taking multiple weapons in one squad can pay off plus the overall cost is not bad.

G

paidinfull wrote:I've been playing 40k for awhile now, since 1st. Competitively since 3rd. I JUST now picked up marines as I really liked the new codex and changes.

From what I've seen, while the MM is awesome and free, you need the range. While the ML is flexible and free, it lacks the armor piercing power.

You need lascannons in a marine list. At least 3 to reliably take out any armor. my friend tried 3 lascannons... 4 actually, and that did not cut it against my vindicator, land raider, dread, and rhino

I think we are all of the mind set that more often than not vehicles will get a cover save. When from experience, most tanks move up to get into range. In the last 4 games I have played, there have been 3 times when my vehicles did not get cover saves, I may have misunderstood your meaning, but a lot of the time, tank commanders will find a way to get that cover save for their tanks, yes, even those vindicators, and land raiders.


Vindicator
Demolisher without las plas
Land Raider to drop its pay load
Trukks
Rhinos

Serpents, Falcons, Raiders, and Ravagers are the few vehicles that come to mind that might get a cover save, while the Tau have a moving cover save.

With a cover save, unless you are playing Tau, regardless what you shoot, half of the time it didn't matter. But when it does matter you want to make sure you got the job done. Higher strength gives you a higher chance of getting it done. Yup this is true, but quantity has it's own quality... don't underestimate the effect of volley fire

Green Blow Fly wrote:Anyways the game is all about mobility now. Units that are static and shoot will be overrun.

Well, actually, this isn't true... SM can run really nasty stand and shoot armies now... they're just not normal stand and shoot armies.... more like drop and shoot.

Sorry, doesn't help the OP, just wanted to point something out

My favorite really is the 4 Man missile Dev squad against most armies you have something to shoot at.


They also kill wraithlords and such pretty effectively along with the way the new template rules work their pretty nice as well.

I think the 4ML five man Dev squad is a solid choice but I would trade one ML for a lascannon so I can shoot it using the signum. Massed ML shooting versus armor such as rhinos, skimmers and trukkz is effective.

G

DOUBLE POST FOR THE FALSE EMPEROR

Not to Derail


The problem I honestly have with Devastator H. Weapons are that they are horribly expensive comparably with what you can have for the point value.


For instance.


5 Man Devastator Squad w/ 4 Missile Launchers is

150 points.

or

Predator Annihilator w/ Twin Linked Laz Turret,
120 points

or

Twin Laz, Laz Side Sponsons 165


Eh, if I am tank hunting I'd honestly like the Predator.


As for Tactical Squads, you can't beat getting that free missile launcher.



The thing I do not like about smal devastator squads is that any significant fire is going to just destroy that fire base.


When I look at a Tactical squad w/ Lascannon Combat Squaded you have 4 other guys you can allocate the wounds to before the lascannon.

I like Devastator (or Havoc, which is what I use) squads but only if you take > minimum size. As others have posted, 8 troops with 4 heavy weapons is a good mix.

The purpose of the Devastator squad is to present a long-range threat that can cover your other advancing units, while at the same time giving the opponent fits as to how to destroy it.

If you get the Devs into a nice spot with cover, they'll be able to reach out and touch their target, while at the same time forcing your opponent to make a tough decision:

Do I shoot at the Dev squad with my long-range weapons, which will statistically need 18+ shots before I start doing any real damage

-or-

Do I ignore them and risk taking big damage from their guns every turn?

As causing distraction for your opponent is at least as important as the damage that the unit causes, buying super-expensive lascannon is not necessarily the best use of resources.

I like Missile Launchers because they are cheaper, and cause a threat against several different types of units, thus increasing the "gotta deal with them" factor, and they have the 48" range, which increases their protection from return fire.

While I like Predators for the economy of their firepower, it is much easier for the enemy general to apportion forces to deal with the pred: Send a MM attack bike, drop meltas, etc.

Lascannon in tactical squads are great because of the Combat Squads rule, and because despite the missile launcher being "free" the Las cannon is not a very big points premium for the unit, and causes the opponent frustration because of having multiple dangerous weapons on multiple small units, rather than having multiple dangerous weapons on one big unit.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Any other heavy weapons are mobile.

Sooo..... What does that entail exactly? I'm shooting my mouth off because your a troll with bad use of grammar and an annoying tendency to make crap up (remember death strike?) and assume everyone else knows what the hell you're talking about.

Oh the irony

I use 6 missile launchers on tacticals in my army. It gives me a tremendous amount of anti light armor, heavy troop, and light troop firepower for no additional cost. I may not be able to pop av 13-14 particularly well, but en-masse I don't have much of an issue with 13. As for av 14, demolishers don't take assaults well and land raiders usually need to move within walking melta range to unleash their cargo. I play a lot of sit and shoot armies, and a fair number of horde armies. Lascanons don't exactly help you tear down a green tide or a swarm of hormugaunts. They don't help much with broadsides either considering they'll be caked in shield drones.

6 Missile launchers on tacticals... You take 60 tactical marines in a regular game? With meltaguns for those "close landraiders", you've just said you use 1050 points in tacticals. (or 1200 with pfist but you probably don't use those.)

The launchers are only AP3, so it'll statistically take you more than 9 missiles fired to take out a single obliterator.

1050 points is as much as 14 whole obliterators (since we're talking about points cost here.)

If you're fighting Chaos, using lascannons instead of MLs can be difference between winning and losing.

Bolters already work against hordes of unarmored infantry. If all you can do is kill infantry then there's a big weakness against elite things.

Same with terminators, broadside battlesuits, 2+ save dakkafexes.

Another nail into the ML's coffin, Autocannons do all anti-tank better with the exception of AV 14.

Well, Chaos marine dev squads can take 4x autocannons, and they cost the same points as missile launchers, but are pretty much just way better. Twice as many shots at only 1 less strength. That's like if a ML shot twice as often as a lascannon because it has that one less. But unfortunately, only autocannons get double shots.

I love when people say the reason not to take Multi-meltas is because they're too short-range, but then they advocate melta guns.

Multi-meltas have twice as much range and twice as long tank-threat area.

If a landraider drives to 5" away from your squad, the assault troops jump out and assault your squad, you are not firing that meltagun at the landraider. At best, if any of your troopers survives that, they'll have fled far out of the 6" super melta range.

ML are okay. They're just not amazing at anything. It's a pretty weak argument that they're better than Lascannons or Multi-meltas.

TheBloodGod wrote:I love when people say the reason not to take Multi-meltas is because they're too short-range, but then they advocate melta guns.

The reason is that melta gunners out of a rhino can get within "melta range" From about 20" away in one turn: 12" move, 2.9" disembark (2"+base size)+6" melta range.

An infantry mounted multi-melta only has a 12" effective melta range in one turn.

I like autocannons too for havocs, but I still think that ML are useful because of the choice of frag or krak.